Alberta
Danielle Smith slams Trudeau’s carbon tax exemption for Atlantic Canada and not rest of country
From LifeSiteNews
‘As a Canadian, do you feel it is fair to continue paying the carbon tax on home heating when some places are now exempt?’ the Alberta premier asked.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith chided Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as being unfair in not applying “tax fairness” for Albertans and all Canadians after Trudeau announced a pause on the carbon tax for home heating oil but only for Atlantic Canada.
“If you’re going to have a federal government asserting that they have to have this power so that everybody is treated equally, then they don’t treat everyone equally. It seems to me that that’s something that should go back to the court and ask them whether or not they want to reconsider whether this is an appropriate use of the federal powers,” Smith said recently at a press conference.
“I would rather the federal government accept that if this is a painful tax coming into winter for Atlantic Canadians, it’s a painful tax going into the winter for everyone and just make sure that he does the right thing and takes the tax off for all types of home heating and every province,” Smith said.
As a Canadian, do you feel it is fair to continue paying the carbon tax on home heating when some places are now exempt?
Comment below 👇 pic.twitter.com/9jHEp9cFpK
— Danielle Smith (@ABDanielleSmith) November 2, 2023
Smith has been fighting a prolonged battle with the Liberal federal government of Trudeau, who has gone on the attack against Alberta’s oil and gas industry through the implementation of ideologically charged laws, including the punitive carbon tax.
Trudeau, however, has given breaks to some parts of the country on the carbon tax for home heating fuels but not others.
He recently announced that he was pausing the collection of the carbon tax on home heating oil in for three years, but only for Atlantic Canadian provinces. The current cost of the carbon tax on home heating fuel is 17 cents per litre. Most Canadians, however, heat their homes with clean-burning natural gas, a fuel that will not be exempted from the carbon tax.
Trudeau’s announcement came amid dismal polling numbers showing his government will be defeated in a landslide by the Conservative Party come the next election.
This resulted in federal Conservative Party (CPC) leader Pierre Poilievre daring Trudeau to call a “carbon tax” election so Canadians can decide for themselves if they want a government for or against a tax that has caused home heating bills to double in some provinces.
Recent political challenges against the carbon tax have failed. Recently, a CPC motion calling for the carbon tax to be paused for all Canadians failed to pass after the Liberal and Bloc Quebecois MPs voted against it. This motion interestingly had support from the New Democratic Party (NDP) but that was not enough to get it passed.
Canadian premiers come together to demand carbon tax pause for all provinces
Trudeau’s latest offering of a three-year pause on the carbon tax in Atlantic Canada has caused a major rift with oil and gas-rich western provinces, notably Alberta and Saskatchewan, and even Manitoba, which has a new NDP government.
This prompted all premiers of Canada to come together to call on the Trudeau government to extend the carbon tax fuel pause to all Canadians.
“All this is doing is causing unfairness, making life less affordable, and really harming the most vulnerable as we get into the winter season,” Smith said today about most provinces being left out of the carbon tax pause.
Going one step further, on November 10, Five Canadian premiers from coast to coast banded together to demand Trudeau drop the carbon tax for home heating for all Canadian provinces, saying his policy of giving one region a tax break over another have caused “divisions” in Canada.
After Trudeau announced a special tax break for Atlantic Canada, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said his province will stop collecting a federal carbon tax on natural gas used to heat homes on January 1, 2024, unless it gets a similar tax break as the Atlantic Canadian provinces.
Alberta has repeatedly promised to place the interests of their people above the Trudeau government’s “unconstitutional” demands while consistently reminding the federal government that their infrastructures and economies depend upon oil, gas, and coal.
As for Smith has fought back, and recently tore a page off a heckler’s fantasy suggestion of a solar and wind battery-powered future after she stepped into the lion’s den to advocate for oil and gas at a conference hosted by a pro-climate change think tank.
Smith has said she will be looking into whether a Supreme Court challenge on the carbon tax is in order. She noted, however, that as Alberta has a deregulated energy industry, unlike Saskatchewan, she is not able to stop collecting the federal carbon tax.
The Trudeau government’s current environmental goals – in lockstep with the United Nations’ “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” – include phasing out coal-fired power plants, reducing fertilizer usage, and curbing natural gas use over the coming decades.
The reduction and eventual elimination of the use of so-called “fossil fuels” and a transition to unreliable “green” energy has also been pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) – the globalist group behind the socialist “Great Reset” agenda – an organization in which Trudeau and some of his cabinet are involved.
The Trudeau government has also defied a recent Supreme Court ruling and will push ahead with its net-zero emission regulations.
Canada’s Supreme Court recently ruled that the federal government’s “no more pipelines” legislation is mostly unconstitutional after a long legal battle with the province of Alberta, where the Conservative government opposes the radical climate change agenda.
Alberta
Ottawa’s oil and gas emissions cap will hit Alberta with a wallop
From the Fraser Institute
Even if Canada eliminated all its GHG emissions expected in 2030 due to the federal cap, the emission reduction would equal only four-tenths of one per cent of global emissions—a reduction unlikely to have any impact on the trajectory of the climate in any detectable manner or produce any related environmental, health or safety benefits.
After considerable waiting, the Trudeau government released on Monday draft regulations to cap greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from Canada’s oil and gas producers.
The proposed regulations would set a cap on GHG emissions equivalent to 35 per cent of the emissions produced in 2019 and create a GHG emissions “cap and trade” system to enable oil and gas producers (who cannot reduce emissions enough to avoid the cap) to buy credits from other producers able to meet the cap. Producers unable to meet the cap will also be able to obtain emission credits (of up to 20 per cent of their needed emission reductions) by investing in decarbonization programs or by buying emission “offsets” in Canada’s carbon markets.
According to the government, the cap will “cap pollution, drive innovation, and create jobs in the oil and gas industry.” But in reality, while the cap may well cap pollution and drive some innovation, according to several recent analyses it won’t create jobs in the oil and gas industry and will in fact kill many jobs.
For example, the Conference Board of Canada think-tank estimates that the cap would reduce Canada’s GDP by up to $1 trillion between 2030 and 2040, kill up to 151,300 jobs across Canada by 2030, and national economic growth from 2023 to 2030 would slow from 15.3 per cent to 14.3 per cent.
Not surprisingly, Alberta would be hardest hit. According to the Board, from 2023 to 2030, the province’s economic growth would fall from an estimated 17.8 per cent to 13.3 per cent and employment growth would fall from 15.8 per cent to 13.6 per cent over the same period. Alberta government revenues from the sector would decline by 4.5 per cent in 2030 compared to a scenario without the cap. As a result, Alberta government revenues would be $4.5 billion lower in nominal terms in fiscal year 2030/31. And between 54,000 to 91,500 of Canada’s job losses would occur in Alberta.
Another study by Deloitte estimates that, due to the federal cap, Alberta will see 3.6 per cent less investment, almost 70,000 fewer jobs, and a 4.5 per cent decrease in the province’s economic output (i.e. GDP) by 2040. Ontario would lose more than 15,000 jobs and $2.3 billion from its economy by 2040. And Quebec would lose more than 3,000 jobs and $0.4 billion from its economy during the same period.
Overall, according to Deloitte, Canada would experience an economic loss equivalent to 1.0 per cent of GDP, translating into lower wages, the loss of nearly 113,000 jobs and a 1.3 per cent reduction in government tax revenues. (For context, Canada’s economic growth in 2023 was only 1.1 per cent.)
And what will Canadians get for all that economic pain?
In my study published last year by the Fraser Institute, I found that, even if Canada eliminated all its GHG emissions expected in 2030 due to the federal cap, the emission reduction would equal only four-tenths of one per cent of global emissions—a reduction unlikely to have any impact on the trajectory of the climate in any detectable manner or produce any related environmental, health or safety benefits.
Clearly, the Trudeau government’s new proposed emissions cap on the oil and gas sector will impose significant harms on Canada’s economy, Canadian workers and our quality of life—and hit Alberta with a wallop. And yet, as a measure intended to avert harmful climate change, it’s purely performative (like many of the government’s other GHG regulations) and will generate too little emission reductions to have any meaningful impact on the climate.
In a world of rational policy development, where the benefits of government regulations are supposed to exceed their costs, policymakers would never consider this proposed cap. The Trudeau government will submit the plan to Parliament, and if the cap becomes law, it will await some other future government to undo the damage inflicted on Canadians and their families.
Author:
Alberta
Edmonton public school board takes action in defiance of Alberta’s proposed pro-family policies
From LifeSiteNews
The Edmonton Public School Board filed a motion against Alberta’s new policies requiring parents to opt in rather than opt out of sex-ed classes and mandating that parental permission is obtained before a student uses a different pronoun.
An Edmonton school board submitted a motion to defy Alberta’s policy requiring parental knowledge if a child goes by different pronouns at school.
On November 5, the Edmonton Public School Board filed a motion against Alberta’s new pro-family policies requiring parents to opt in rather than opt out of sex-ed classes and mandating that parental permission is obtained before a student uses a different pronoun.
“The Division’s current policy on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression is part of our mandate to provide a safe, welcoming and healthy school environment for students, staff and families,” the board claimed in the motion sent to the Board of Trustees.
“The policy changes being proposed by Premier Smith will contradict what our Board, and previous Boards of Trustees, have worked hard to ensure: the safety and well being of all children in Edmonton Public schools,” it continued.
The new policies, introduced last week by Alberta Premier Danielle Smith under Bill 27, will mean that sex-education classes will not be included in a child’s education, and teachers or school staff will no longer be allowed to conceal whether a student begins to use different pronouns or names.
Once Bill 27 becomes law, schools must notify parents of what is being taught at least “30 days in advance and be given the opportunity to opt in rather than opt out of this instruction.”
However, while Alberta is working to keep parents informed and children safe from the radical LGBT agenda, the Edmonton board has argued parents must be kept in the dark to prevent them from stopping their children from accepting the falsehoods of the LGBT agenda.
“For transgender youth who choose a name different from the one given at birth, use of their chosen name in multiple contexts affirms their gender identity and reduces mental health risks, which are known to be high in this group,” the board claimed.
However, significant body of evidence shows that “affirming” gender confusion carries serious harms, especially when done with impressionable children who lack the mental development, emotional maturity, and life experience to consider the long-term ramifications of the decisions being pushed on them, or full knowledge about the long-term effects of life-altering, physically transformative, and often irreversible surgical and chemical procedures.
Studies find that more than 80 percent of children suffering gender dysphoria outgrow it on their own by late adolescence and that “transition” procedures, including “reassignment” surgery, fail to resolve gender-confused individuals’ heightened tendency to engage in self-harm and suicide – and even exacerbate it, including by reinforcing their confusion and neglecting the actual root causes of their mental strife.
Additionally, as LifeSiteNews previously reported, many Ontario parents revealed that public schools did not ask for parental consent before “gender transitioning” their children, resulting in child-parent relationships being destroyed.
Furthermore, many teachers struggle to keep secret from parents. A Saskatchewan teacher who wished to remain anonymous previously told LifeSiteNews that she feels guilty about keeping secrets from parents and supports the decision to keep parents informed.
“I fear that we are not supporting students or parents when we keep secrets,” she explained. “We have many students using alternate names, which sometimes changes frequently during the year, and then are asked by parents if we were aware of the changes after the fact. I feel responsible for keeping the secret and I don’t think it’s fair. I think schools are already taking on too many ‘parent roles’ and it’s important that parents play the ‘parent role’ not teachers!”
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Trump Is Back And Foreign Leaders Are Taking Notice
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy1 day ago
How Canadians lost the rule of law
-
Daily Caller23 hours ago
‘It’s Gonna End On Day One’: GOP Lawmakers, Fishermen Urge Trump To Keep Promise To Axe Offshore Wind
-
International2 days ago
Trump takes Arizona, completes swing state sweep
-
International2 days ago
Trump presents 10-point plan to dismantle and de-weaponize the ‘Deep State’
-
Opinion2 days ago
Britain’s vast camera network is being used to secretly surveil drivers, privacy experts warn
-
C2C Journal1 day ago
Net Gain: A Common-Sense Climate Change Policy for Canada
-
Business16 hours ago
Up to $41 billion in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds